[Teammetrics-discuss] What is left.

[Andreas Tille]

Hi,

[Scott if you are reading please comment on the item below marked by
@Scott.]

On Wed, Aug 17, 2011 at 01:02:34PM +0530, Sukhbir Singh wrote:
> Next week Monday is the deadline for GSoC and even though I am not
> going to run away after that, we should try to fix everything by that
> time :)

:-)
 
> Here is what is left according to me, so please contribute if I forgot
> something:
> 
> 1. We have to fix Gitstat and I am working on that and hopefully
> should be done by today if I don't run into any more problems.

This would be my highest preference.  Please try to adapt David
Bremner's code to make sure we really track the commits in debian/.  If
anything remains unclear please discuss this on the list (perhaps David
in CC).

This has highest preference because this implements something which is
really new to the previous approach.  We need also think about proper
graphing of this.  For the moment I could think of preparing different
graphs featuring

   1. Number of commits (as ist was done by me before)
   2. lines_inserted
   3. lines_deleted
   4. lines_inserted+lines_deleted
   5. lines_inserted-lines_deleted (??)

Then we should look if "we see something" ...
But as I said: Before we can play with the numbers we need the correct
numbers.

> 2. nntpstat disconnects if it downloads lots of lists. This can be
> fixed by downloading the approach you told me to follow. Do you want
> me doing that or should we depend on the mbox archives from the list
> masters?

Well, my prefered way is definitely the mbox approach because this is
the only thing which makes really sense.  However, I do not expect it
ready in five days.

> 3. ... what else?

3. As in the commitstats example we should work out the graphics which
   are regarding the new measures of the message length.

4. I have copied my code of the Upload statistics into the repository.
   Please make yourself a bit comfortable with this - perhaps you see
   some chance for enhancements, but I think it is OK as it is. 

@Scott:
5. I also would have loved to apply the measure Scott mentioned but
   I'm afraid we are a bit late.

6. What I would have loved would have been much more thorough testing /
   comparing new and old results but I think this needs to be done
   later when we really run the stuff.  We should probably run both in
   parallel and watch potential differences.

I tend to do the following summary of the work:  At the end of the GSoC
term we have not finished all the tasks we intended to do (finished in
the sense of thoroughly tested, stable and documented).  However, we had
to fight some unexpected external influences (missing mboxes etc.) which
caused hard to calculate delays - as every programming work.  In any
case we did a great step foreward in this term.  From here it is easy to
proceed and complete things into the shape I wanted it to have including
new and interesting ideas - so it was a success in any case.

You also had to spend some time in preparation of DebConf (uhmm, I would
hate begging for a Visa that much) and your time at DebConf has probably
also drained from pure coding time.  However, I really regard this as
much more important to become a member of the project rather than
writing some lines of code right in time for the and of GSoC term.
Moreover the BOF at DebConf has brought in some additional ideas which
are not coded as well - but it is easy to do it later.  (I just had some
quick look into UDD and I thinks we can do something about bugs closed
by a team member.)

So in this sense I will fill in my mentor form in Melange that I will
not score full points for project finished as planed (which is in most
cases not realistic anyway) but that I regard the GSoC project as a
success regarding analysing team performance in Debian.

Kind regards

       Andreas.

-- 
http://fam-tille.de